To read or not to read- that is the question.
Should we read to challenge and modify our worldview based on other thinkers or build it based on our life experiences only ?
At the first look the question seems trivial. It’s a subjective choice (though even the subjective choices are influenced by the culture.). Read if you like or don’t. Let’s give a second and a slower thought to split open the triviality to get a better understanding.
We read for information or for pleasure. We read to see the new in the world or see a new world and sometimes the same world from different eyes/minds.
As we are expected to remain aware of the happenings around us- so we read news/ articles related to our professions by necessity to keep our life going. The other two types of readings are optional- Literature and Philosophy comes in those. They are what forms the basis of our worldview if we ever are individualistic enough to construct our own and not go along with the one handed down by the mass society .
The news is just the furnishings- Curtains, Doors, Color of paint to that basic worldview. If the world is getting violent we make the doors stronger. If the state is interfering too much we choose a darker shade of curtains. If we require solidarity we paint it similar to others. News can only provide adjustments. What we as conscious humans require is a worldview closest to actual reality (assuming it’s not the other way around).
Here we return to our question- To read or not to read with the aim of forming a worldview. To understand how the world works. In favor of reading- as they say we can stand on the shoulders of the giants who came before us to look further. We can save our time to reach that level of thought. We can use books as a map to reach a new place to update our mental model. As the 19th century Philosopher Ralph Waldo Emersion Says, “I cannot remember the books I’ve read any more than the meals I have eaten; even so, they have made me.” The books we read play role in making us.
The dilemma is proven by another argument by the same philosopher. He says — “Why shouldn’t we also enjoy an original relation to the universe? Why should we not have a poetry and philosophy of insight and not of tradition………..The sun shines to-day also”. He asks us to let go of all previous thoughts and have our own as we too are born with the same mental faculties as Plato or Caesar. We can stand on the giants to see far but we could only see in the direction giants were already going. The books similar to maps are a log of what is discovered. So you cannot discover an entirely new place using a map. We need to step out into the unknown for that to happen.
For me the conflict is not resolved. Sometimes I feel the urge to vomit everything ever learned so as to have a single original thought. But the pleasure I get from access to the greatest of the minds and to reach that level of thinking is almost convincing to keep reading forever. It is like a delicious meal prepared by a professional chef. You can cook your whole life and may not be able to match that taste. But then is the pleasure more from eating best once or getting better every time you cook ?
In my experience reading helps to discover the possibilities out of normal thoughts. But we should be careful to not take it as a limitation to what is possible. We should use this map not to stop at the boundary but to start our exploration beyond those boundaries. It is also obvious that even without reading we can shift out worldview albeit slowly but more solidly (as opposed to contradicting views).We can have a stroll in a familiar place and observe new things.
Sometimes if we are lucky, nature does it for us. The challenges and events we face are so powerful that no books and thoughts come close to them. So reading is helpful to have that base but more important is living- to have your own experiences, to have your own contemplation to build that worldview brick by brick even if it never gets completed.
